Next time you hear a liberal moan about the way the GOP uses religion to motivate voters, refer them to an old memoir of the 1948 election by Jack Redding, entitled Inside the Democratic Party. In a passage on p. 17-18 describing the excruciating election night that year, he observes that Massachusetts was solidly within the Truman column, Redding explains:
[Democratic Chairman Howard McGrath:] “We’ll sweep Massachusetts. I knew it. We were bound to win with that vote.” He was referring to the referendum on the Massachusetts ballot as to whether state health authorities should be allowed to give out birth-control information. The Catholic Church in Massachusetts had waged a holy war to have its members at the polls to vote against the question. The vast outpouring of Catholic voters, largely Democratic, meant we had every right to expect the Democrats, out to vote on the birth-control referendum, to stay and vote in the presidential and gubernatorial elections. Our hopes had proved right. Massachusetts was ours.
Hat tip: Skepticseye.com As the Skeptic comments, "Imagine. Utilizing a referendum on a sensitive social issue to mobilize religious voters. Who are Democrats. In Massachusetts."
Steven- What are we to make of this? A nearly 60 year old example, in which Democrats apparently hope to take advantage of a chronological coincidence, that began with an initiative in which the Catholic Church urged its members to vote.
Someone had to go back 60 years to find this "evidence" that there is no reason for Democrats to accuse Right-wingers for inviting religion into government and vice versa?
Is that what this is? I think it achieves the opposite!
What are we to make of this? Youre kidding, right? Well, many things, but prominent among them the obvious point that Democrats used to be the natural home of socially conservative Christians (one of Winston Churchills dislikes of the Republican Party 100 years ago was its secularism). It is another example of how the parties have changed places, and prominent among the reasons why the Democrats are now a minority party. Being a 60 year old example just shows the poverty of so-called "progressive" thought.
Not kidding at all. I thought, from your tone:
"Next time you hear a liberal moan ...." and
"Imagine. Utilizing a referendum on a sensitive social issue to mobilize religious voters. Who are Democrats. In Massachusetts.".... that you were suggesting some hypocracy among Democrats, because, as a "progressive" party, they have actually changed over 60 years.
As you observe, the Republican party has changed in a complementary way over the same span of time. So, are you celebrating progress, or are you ignoring the Republican changes, while you assail the Democrats with them?